That is a really interesting article. The big surprise to me was Oklahoma, had not idea they played that high above their expectations. My real question is how does a perennial power like Oklahoma recruit to such a low level that they are considered a top 10 over achiever?

t4pizza wrote:That is a really interesting article. The big surprise to me was Oklahoma, had not idea they played that high above their expectations. My real question is how does a perennial power like Oklahoma recruit to such a low level that they are considered a top 10 over achiever?

Looking at the talent column, they have App at 323 while some of our peers have higher ratings. It's showing talent levels for GS 413 (+90 over App) and ODU 333 (+10 over App) yet the Mountaineers have outscored these 2 opponents over the last 2 games a combined 145-30. Outside of the service academies, WYO is the only other team in the top 60 to supposedly have lesser talent. It's even showing GaSt (328) as having more talent so if we throw them in with GS and ODU over the past 2 seasons, App has outscored those 3 a total of 199-36.

We all know all it takes is an offer from a P5 school to raise a player's profile. A high 2* kid who's had offers from G5s for months suddenly gets an offer from NC State will suddenly become a low 3*. Or a 3* suddenly becomes a 4* when he gets an offer from Florida State.

We all know all it takes is an offer from a P5 school to raise a player's profile. A high 2* kid who's had offers from G5s for months suddenly gets an offer from NC State will suddenly become a low 3*. Or a 3* suddenly becomes a 4* when he gets an offer from Florida State.

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the overachievers tend to come from outside the P5. The recruiting services just don’t spend nearly the resources evaluating prospects at our level, so the recruiting rankings naturally aren’t as accurate. That and I imagine coaching plays a bigger role when nobody has a roster full of future pros to just out-athlete most of their opponents.